[“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,”]

Hey Jude - I am dealing strictly with the contents of the book. 

Okay, filledeplage.  Since you have read the entire book, I have a question for you.

In the CBS news interview, Mike says this:

“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,” Love said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/beach-boys-mike-love-opens-up-drama-with-cousin-brian-wilson/

Another poster who I assume has also read the book (I could be wrong, that's why I'm asking you) says that Melinda didn't speak these words to Mike.  Rather, Melinda was speaking to Mike's wife and the exchange was more along these lines:

Melinda "storms" to Jacquelyne, says Ambha can't sing a Brian lead
Mike's wife replies, "Mike already discussed the matter with his partner, Brian.”
And Melinda answers, “Mike’s not his fucking partner. I’m his fucking partner.”

Two very different accounts of what I assume to be the same event. 
One version says Melinda told Mike that Brian wasn't Mike's partner, and that she (Melinda) was Mike's partner.
The other version says that Melinda told Mike's wife that Mike's not Brian's partner, and that she (Melinda) was Brian's partner.
Which of these two versions is in Mike's book?

Cheers

Debbie - the empty seats were the result of a Bernie delegate walkout which was hardly covered. Some videos were taken and show images of white noise machines above their seating which were installed to drown out their protests which were quite loud in opposition.

   Just what, exactly, does a "white noise machine" look like?  I don't agree with you politically, it seems, but your posts sure are funny.  Keep 'em coming!

The Democratic convention was powerful.  After watching the doom and gloom oozing off the stage in Cleveland last week, and listening to the orange snake oil salesman proclaim that only he can fix whatever he thinks is wrong with this country, I felt sick to my stomach at the thought of this man person becoming the president of the most powerful nation on earth.  It was so refreshing and inspiring, then, to see speakers in Philly actually talk about how great this country is, while acknowledging that there is more work for all of us to do to make things even better.  I heard them speak about family values, faith, patriotism, and the constitution.  I heard them speak about all of us working together to find solutions to some of the problems we face today.  All I heard from Adolf the Donald is "I alone can fix it".  How is this race even close?

ISIS  and affiliates have declared a war on "Crusaders/Jews"  worldwide and have effectuated attacks in multiple countries by way of instructive video via social media with either bombs made from household materials, (like pressure cookers at the Boston Marathon) to avenge others (a broad group) and to impose their legal system from a radical sect going back centuries.  Comparing McVeigh to ISIS does not make sense to me.  These attacks are coming every day, sometimes twice a day.  

There is an ideology in conflict with our culture and practices.  We give women the right to vote, and self determine.  They don't ask permission of a man to do anything.  They are free.  Gay people are not thrown off buildings.  Those ideas clash with our laws.  There can be no conflict.  The US Constitution is the law of the land.  Period.  We don't follow the laws of another religion because we don't recognize the mixing of religion and law.  They are separate.  

I agree with a great deal of the responses to this initial post but I would just like to throw in my two cents in regards to this particular quotation. What you are saying about the US is true insofar as it pertains to American soil. But to say that the ideology of ISIS is in conflict "with our culture and practices" is unfortunately not entirely correct. After all, the US is a major contributor to Saudi Arabia, which is probably the most extreme fundamentalist country in the world. And, in fact, a great deal of ISIS's support comes from Saudi Arabian elites. It may be that the country supports the kind of freedom that you describe domestically but it actively supports the kind of repression that you describe in the international sphere. So, in my view, the reality is not quite the conflict that you describe.

ISIS is a deplorable and monstrous organization to be sure and we should be thinking of realistic ways to eliminate them. That said, when you consider what I have noted above, along with the US's atrocious foreign policy record, and the fact that the US virtually created the circumstances out which ISIS could flourish on multiple occasions, demonstrates that the country simply does not have the moral standing to take the issue on in any legitimate way.

CSM - I agree completely about Saudi Arabia and those other countries, who have funded this horrific effort. And have been complicit in this mess. I have not gone there. The back-channels are mind-boggling. The corruption is worse. But, I do think the extreme ideology is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution as far as gender equality that is in practice and not in theory.  Women can't self-determine. Gays are thrown off the highest building. And there is a desire to impose their standards of life, on the rest of the world.  That is incompatible with our sense of liberty.  

The US is not perfect.  They must do better. I guess my biggest problem is that there is a reluctance to address the war with ISIS.  People say that these attacks are out of frustration from the military inroads.  It sounds more like damage control to me.  Two attacks a day is the new normal.  Should we accept this? They blew it in Iraq by not leaving a reserve of soldiers to help stabilize the area, just to fulfill a campaign promise.  Sometimes you have to adapt to the circumstances and that is the wiser course. Campaigning is different than getting into the job once you are elected and "learn the ropes." Sometimes you have to admit that you cannot fulfill all your campaign promises.  Obama did a poor job in that area. Admitting a mistake is a sign of a great leader and not a weak one.

As I watch this Democratic convention, I worry about the direction of education being dumbed-down, national security, etc., and the smoke-screen of whether an air conditioner is wrecking the environment when these hypocrites take separate jets (husband and wife) to arrive at the same destination to discuss the environment.  Then "preach" to the citizens and try to throw a guilt-trip on them to distract from their own failures.  

Thanks, CSM, for the post.  The world is a mess.        


 

a man is a man if he have but a hose on his head but after meat comes mustard. But who's got the cowbell? Everyone cannot have a nose like a shoeing horn.

 

That Party comment brings up the great lost art

Yes it does.  But I'm not great...just a hard workin' guy. 






I'll just be moving along now.

Emily - there are enough "people" who voted for Trump, whether they are crossover Dems, dyed-in-the-wool Republicans, or Independents.  

How do you explain that?  Is everyone who voted for Trump a bigot?  

Or, are they just scared to death of terrorism for themselves or their kids, and who are sick to death of the status quo?  

How do you explain that Bush had $10 million in media money, is 3rd generation entrenched in the party, and got his butt kicked by a newbie?  

Are they all bad and stupid or ignorant?  

I would say that if "people" are scared to death of terrorism, and they vote for Mr. Trump because of their fears, then they are ignorant.

P.S.  I just giggled because now I can't get the theme song for Mr. Ed out of my head. :singing: A horse is a horse, of course, of course, And no one can talk to a horse of course. That is, of course, unless the horse is the famous Mister Trump.

Lost Art - no doubt there will be a lot of parody. But it is their vote to use or waste as they choose. 

That's what makes 'murica great.  What?  We're not great?.  When did that happen?  Well, that's what makes 'murica 'murica, then.

Emily - there are enough "people" who voted for Trump, whether they are crossover Dems, dyed-in-the-wool Republicans, or Independents.  

How do you explain that?  Is everyone who voted for Trump a bigot?  

Or, are they just scared to death of terrorism for themselves or their kids, and who are sick to death of the status quo?  

How do you explain that Bush had $10 million in media money, is 3rd generation entrenched in the party, and got his butt kicked by a newbie?  

Are they all bad and stupid or ignorant?  

I would say that if "people" are scared to death of terrorism, and they vote for Mr. Trump because of their fears, then they are ignorant.

P.S.  I just giggled because now I can't get the theme song for Mr. Ed out of my head. :singing: A horse is a horse, of course, of course, And no one can talk to a horse of course. That is, of course, unless the horse is the famous Mister Trump.

“You know, it really doesn’t matter what the media write as long as you’ve got a young, and beautiful, piece of ass.”
 
“If I were running ‘The View’, I’d fire Rosie O’Donnell. I mean, I’d look at her right in that fat, ugly face of hers, I’d say ‘Rosie, you’re fired.’”
 
“Ariana Huffington is unattractive, both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man – he made a good decision.”

“I’ve said if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.”

"A person who is very flat-chested is very hard to be a 10."

“Heidi Klum. Sadly, she’s no longer a 10.”

"Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next next president? I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not supposed to say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?"

Filledeplage, knowing that you are a woman, I'm wondering how it makes you feel when the presumed republican nominee for the President of the United States says these kinds of things.  I mean, this is only a small sample of the disgusting things that he has said about women.  Obviously, I don't know who you are going to vote for in this upcoming election, but you've made it quite clear that it's not going to be Mrs. Clinton.  So then, who?  Gary Johnson?  Chris Keniston?  Darrell Castle?  Certainly an independent thinker such as yourself would not consider voting for someone as boorish and sexist as Mr Trump.  I'm seriously trying to wrap my head around why any woman would vote for such a pig.

So, any lunatic like this guy can go buy a military grade weapon that was specifically invented to kill people, and lots of them, and as quickly as possible, and that is okay.  But a person who buys, say, a couple of ounces of weed which can do no harm to anyone, can get 10 years in prison.  WTF?  Screw the NRA.  Screw Ted Nugent.  Screw Drumpf.  May God help us all.

Ahh, so threads are not being deleted, as Gump (stupid is as stupid does) initially stated in his post from May 26th.  Now he/she says that some former members are deleting content that they had placed in threads.  It does seem to me that Gump was trying to get people to think that the moderators were removing threads.  Can a member delete a whole thread if said member started that thread?

I started playing guitar in front of people for money in 1972, while I was a junior in high school, but I couldn't continue while I attended college.  After two years of college, I dropped out and started playing in bands again, and it became my (mostly) sole career until 18 years later, at which time I found out I was going to be a father.  The band was working 4 to 6 nights a week, but I figured I'd need some things for my new family that a music career could not provide, so I went back to school at 39 years old, graduated, got a steady day job (which I still have nearly 20 years later, knock wood), and quit the band.  

Alas, music is in my blood, so after a year or so, when I got the opportunity to join one of the bands that I had played with back in the '80s, I took it.  They weren't gigging nearly as much as we did back in the '80s, so I had the time to work, take care of my daughter, and play out 2 or 3 times a month.  Perfect.  That band finally hung it up this last year.  I guess I played with them for 23 years, all told, which is amazing.  

Of course, that 'music in the blood' thing doesn't ever seem to go away, so I immediately joined another band that I'd played with in the '90s, and I continue to play as I creep up on my 60th birthday.  My vocal range isn't what it was 40 years ago, but I think I'm a better singer now.  I don't play as many notes on guitar solos as I did back then, but that is by choice.  It's still a lot of fun for me, and if it ever stops being fun, I will quit.  I may need a blood transfusion to do it, though.

[SCAPEGOAT]

It is easy and convenient to find a scapegoat. For a variety of reasons it is vastly more difficult to identify the root causes, especially if they might be found in areas that would rather not be addressed by some.

SCAPEGOAT, it that the breed of goat that adorns the sleeve of Pet Sounds ?  

Just trying to inject some 'Good Homour' into this rather depressing thread

No.  The Pet Sounds goats are ESCAPEGOATS.  You know, Let's Goat Away For Awhile, You Still Bleat In Me, and the rest.  

Is sauerkraut a condiment?  I supposed it is.  I don't really care because I do not like it.  I also do not like pickle relish, although I do force myself to eat it when I have a Chicago style dog.  Same with mustard.  I do like ketchup on fries or maybe a burger.  I used to put it on hot dogs or bratwursts when I was younger, but no longer.  My girlfriend puts it on scrambled eggs.  No, thank you, please.  Mayo (not Miracle Whip) is okay in small amounts.  I love salsa or pico de gallo.

Well, we may not be in sync on analogies, but we are on condiments.

Common ground. 

You can't lose the "old timers" and prosper under these conditions. This board, like any board, needs them back. Threads they shared, full of knowledge, are being deleted..in talking to others who are still around more of these threads are going to be deleted.

Threads are being deleted?  What threads?

Is sauerkraut a condiment?  I supposed it is.  I don't really care because I do not like it.  I also do not like pickle relish, although I do force myself to eat it when I have a Chicago style dog.  Same with mustard.  I do like ketchup on fries or maybe a burger.  I used to put it on hot dogs or bratwursts when I was younger, but no longer.  My girlfriend puts it on scrambled eggs.  No, thank you, please.  Mayo (not Miracle Whip) is okay in small amounts.  I love salsa or pico de gallo.

You're all making this much more difficult than it needs to be.  Treat Craig and Billy as if they were just normal posters.  Because they are.  They only put on their moderator hats when board rules are broken.  Don't break any board rules, and you shouldn't have to worry whether it's 'mod' Craig or 'board member' Craig, or Billy.  It's really as simple as that.

Well said

Sorry, I disagree.
LostArt said, "Don't break any board rules, and you shouldn't have to worry whether it's 'mod' Craig or 'board member' Craig, or Billy.  It's really as simple as that." I've heard the exact same thing said many times about the police, "don't break the law and you shouldn't have to worry about interactions with police" and I disagree. I think most people, if a police car pulled over to you and the officer started telling you something you did was wrong, would assume the police officer was speaking in an official capacity. I've been assuming the same of the mods. It seems I was wrong to do so, but I think it's a natural assumption and not as simple as LostArt says.

This is a message board, Emily.  This isn't the police.  Watch out when Billy puts his moderator cap on, though.   

Of course. It's an analogy. My point is that I think there's a base assumption, if there's a mod telling you you've done wrong, that they are telling you with the hat on. Maybe they should end their post with exactly THAT emoji when they are modding. That would be entertaining and useful.

I do know where you're coming from.  My dad was the chief of Police in a small Wisconsin town of about 1000 residents.  Everybody knew everyone else.  My dad did not have more than a few close friends in that little town, even while he was off-duty, and I believe it's because everyone else was afraid that they'd say or do the wrong thing. 

But I still don't believe that it is a good analogy.

You're all making this much more difficult than it needs to be.  Treat Craig and Billy as if they were just normal posters.  Because they are.  They only put on their moderator hats when board rules are broken.  Don't break any board rules, and you shouldn't have to worry whether it's 'mod' Craig or 'board member' Craig, or Billy.  It's really as simple as that.

Well said

Sorry, I disagree.
LostArt said, "Don't break any board rules, and you shouldn't have to worry whether it's 'mod' Craig or 'board member' Craig, or Billy.  It's really as simple as that." I've heard the exact same thing said many times about the police, "don't break the law and you shouldn't have to worry about interactions with police" and I disagree. I think most people, if a police car pulled over to you and the officer started telling you something you did was wrong, would assume the police officer was speaking in an official capacity. I've been assuming the same of the mods. It seems I was wrong to do so, but I think it's a natural assumption and not as simple as LostArt says.

This is a message board, Emily.  This isn't the police.  Watch out when Billy puts his moderator cap on, though.   

Message deleted.

You're all making this much more difficult than it needs to be.  Treat Craig and Billy as if they were just normal posters.  Because they are.  They only put on their moderator hats when board rules are broken.  Don't break any board rules, and you shouldn't have to worry whether it's 'mod' Craig or 'board member' Craig, or Billy.  It's really as simple as that.

I obviously don't post much, but I've been around this board since it's creation, and was a member of the Smile Shop before that.  I've enjoyed Craig's posts on the old board, and on this one, before and after he became a mod here.  I don't consider him a moderator as much as I consider him to be a knowledgeable, passionate fan of the Beach Boys.  A moderator's place on an open forum such as this is to enforce the board's rules.  Period.  When not in 'police mode', they should be able to discuss, passionately if desired, any subject with any other poster(s).  I consider them to be moderators only when they're considering a rules violation.  Otherwise, they're just posters who happened to take on the thankless task of monitoring what often seems to be a bunch of whining children.  Personally, I wouldn't be able to handle the job, nor would I want to.  Craig and Billy are outstanding moderators.  They're fair, yes sometimes passionate, and they seem like really nice guys.  My two cents worth.

Changed thread title.  

Was there a reason for having "for AGD" in the title? I know people miss him, but it seemed odd.

I guess it was directed at him originally, due to his ongoing battles with CK.

That's exactly right.  As I said above, I didn't know he was banned at the time I posted it.

Changed thread title.  

Was there a reason for having "for AGD" in the title? I know people miss him, but it seemed odd.

I actually didn't know that he was banned until today.  I feel a little foolish.

Changed thread title. 

I don't know if this would be considered "derailing," but since we're talking about the "event"....

Don't recall if I mentioned this before, but...part of me wonders if maybe Brian *faked* his breakdown. Why do I wonder? Well...

We know Brian didn't like touring. His place was the studio. And it was eye-opening to read The Lost Beach Boy and learn that Brian really hardly toured in 1963. Why? because he had to stay behind and compose and produce. And he was a busy guy in the studio in '63, producing not only stuff for the Beach Boys but side projects as well, including the Honeys, Bob & Sheri, etc. Meanwhile the touring band consists of Dennis, Mike, Carl, David, and Al.

So Dave quits. Brian freaks. Why? Because that means he'll be called upon to go back on the road, which he didn't like. He tells Murry and the rest of the band that he needs to stay back and write and produce. They ignore Brian's concerns and he ends up joining them.

Is it not unthinkable that for a long time he tried to convince the rest of the group that he needs to be off the road, to no avail, so he fakes a nervous breakdown to scare the rest of the guys into finally agreeing to let him stay home?

Mind you this hypothesis kind of goes against my strong belief that, as proven in 1972 during the Holland fiasco, Brian does NOT do anything he truly does not want to do. (But then again, this is 1964 I'm talking here. 1972 Brian and 1964 Brian = in many ways completely different Brians.)

But still...I gotta wonder. (Remember, I said *********wonder********. I'm not saying he ***did*** fake it; just entertaining the possibility.)

My brain cells may not be what they used to be, but didn't Lorren Daro state that Brian did exactly that?  I tried to read through some of that Daro thread, but I couldn't find the post where he said that.  It may have been removed, or it may be in that thread somewhere, or I may be mis-remembering altogether.  FWIW.  Which may not be much.   

She's had a great career, but, well, we've talked much about Carol already.  More of the same here, really.

http://www.vulture.com/2016/04/carol-kaye-sets-record-straight.html